The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Announcements
Updated: Emailing and Other Old-Fashioned Technologies
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

[Update: Use of the new Emailing system has been so widespread that we quickly reached the normal email limit imposed by our rented server, temporarily suspending service. On Monday, we'll make arrangements to have our limit raised much higher, restoring our email service. Obviously it's an encouraging sign that we reached the normal email limit just two days after releasing the module.]

As many readers of this webzine are already aware, I’m quite old-fashioned in my software tastes, almost never using Facebook, Twitter, or RSS feeds, while the notion that someone could regularly interact with websites on the tiny screen of a smartphone simply mystifies me. Instead, email remains my primary means of Internet communication.

For old-fashioned email-centric fogies such as myself, I’ve just added a powerful Emailing module to the website, allowing visitors to email Post, Article, and Archive pages as fully-rendered webpages, looking almost identical to the original, graphics included. Just press the small “Email” button newly located near the top of your pages, provide the necessary information, including an optional message at the top, and press the Send Email button. If you send out a webpage to yourself, you can see how the result looks.

Although this feature may sound rather trivial, it was actually quite difficult to build, and I’m not aware of any other website, from the august New York Times on downward, that possesses this capability (“emailed” articles are almost invariably just sent out merely as links). The reason for this difficulty is that modern webpages are rendered based on complex CSS style sheets and most email clients, including the ubiquitous Gmail, can’t interpret CSS, producing near-garbage looking emails as a result. The only real way to get around this incompatibility is to build a fully generalized—and fast!—CSS parser/embedder that replaces the web page’s CSS with hard-coded style tags, which all email clients can properly interpret. Given the enormous complexity of both CSS stylesheets and webpages, this is a highly difficult task and I was pleasantly surprised that I actually managed to build such a system. The very nice looking emails are the result.

With the difficult phase of the project completed, I’ll probably soon add a module allowing email-centric readers to “subscribe” to the posts or articles of specific contributors, which would be emailed out as soon as they are published, filling a role similar to that of an RSS feed. I’ll also probably begin offering an emailed Weekly Digest, summarizing the most popular articles and blog posts of the previous week.

 

Meanwhile, for more modern users, who probably regard email is something akin to fax machines and stone tablets, I have also added the major Social Networking buttons—Likeing, Tweeting, RSS, and such—to the Mobile edition, and will probably be making a few other Mobile layout changes in the next couple of days.

Please feel free to pass along your suggestions and complaints on these and any other matters.

 
Hide 34 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Old fogey says:

    Bravo!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /announcement/emailing-and-other-old-fashioned-technologies/#comment-871983
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Pat Casey says:

    *correction

    Ron, no one has ever so earned the right to name their site their name. (That reminds of when Richard Spencer said he wanted AternativeRight.com to be called FrumForum.com, which I still think is hysterical.) But because people usually think I’m saying Utz, I’ve started telling everyone I talk to to check out U – N – Z dot com. Which definitely makes it sound more interesting. What could U N Z stand for? Underground News Zine?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alex M

    What could U N Z stand for? Underground News Zine?
     
    Union of Nationalist Zapatistas

    http://www.unz.com/runz/unz-on-hispanic-crime-a-postscript/?highlight=postscript
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. A worthwhile accomplishment!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Alex M says:
    @Pat Casey
    *correction

    Ron, no one has ever so earned the right to name their site their name. (That reminds of when Richard Spencer said he wanted AternativeRight.com to be called FrumForum.com, which I still think is hysterical.) But because people usually think I'm saying Utz, I've started telling everyone I talk to to check out U - N - Z dot com. Which definitely makes it sound more interesting. What could U N Z stand for? Underground News Zine?

    What could U N Z stand for? Underground News Zine?

    Union of Nationalist Zapatistas

    http://www.unz.com/runz/unz-on-hispanic-crime-a-postscript/?highlight=postscript

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. The reason you were able to do this, and Breitbart or DailyMail won’t and can’t, is that your layout is far simpler, and static, to begin with. The direction most commercial websites are going, pretty soon emailing their content will be as feasible as emailing a television program.

    In saying that, I’m not putting down your site; I’m praising it. I read it mostly on a cell phone and the quick loading and low bandwidth requirements are a plus.

    I’m commenting, of course, on your site’s layout. As for its content, you have a few people worth reading, but the rest are bores and cranks — running all the way to hard-core “holohoax” obsessives. In fact I would sooner send my friends a link to Vdare (and I care too much about keeping my friends to do that) than to unz.com.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    I never visit Breitbart or DailyMail, but I certainly agree it's impossible to email out out webpages that are enormously heavy with all sorts of jquery/Javascript interactions, massive video, and lots of complex advertising. But as far as I know, none of the more purely HTML websites have ever had email capability either, and until the last few years, almost all websites were mostly just HTML. If you count WordPress sites, I'd think that even today 99% of all the sites on the Internet are basically just HTML with a little Javascript here and there.

    Frankly, when I wanted to implement this feature, I naturally assumed someone had already built an webpage emailing system years ago, and was surprised when I discovered that wasn't the case. The problem really isn't all that trivial in the fully general case, and I'll even admit I cut some corners so long as the end result works on my reasonably complex HTML/CSS structures.

    As for the "cranks and bores" here, I'm sure absolutely everyone else agrees with you about that. It's just that they have entirely disjoint views about who the "cranks and bores" actually are.
    , @Hail
    "your layout is far simpler, and static, to begin with.[....] I’m praising it. I read it mostly on a cell phone and the quick loading and low bandwidth requirements are a plus."

    Agreed. Please don't make any big changes that bog things down. This site is sleek and almost entirely perfect the way it is for my tastes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. “I’m quite old-fashioned in my software tastes, almost never using Facebook, Twitter, or RSS feeds, while the notion that someone could regularly interact with websites on the tiny screen of a smartphone simply mystifies me. Instead, email remains my primary means of Internet communication.”

    That could be me talking.

    Thank you, Ron, for your good, hard work. I am heartened by the fact that a man with your talents is like me when it comes to these preferences.

    There have been times I wished websites would allow me to email pages in this manner. Now I can do it with yours.

    Perhaps you could sell this program to other website owners.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    I’ve long been emailing unz.com articles as full text and graphics, always having to copy the link over from Chrome on either OS X or iOS (my default browser for both desktop and mobile), reopen the page in Safari (again on either platform), and then enable ‘Reader View’ before finally emailing via the ‘Share’ menu; thanks for so elegantly simplifying the process!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. Ron Unz says:
    @International Jew
    The reason you were able to do this, and Breitbart or DailyMail won't and can't, is that your layout is far simpler, and static, to begin with. The direction most commercial websites are going, pretty soon emailing their content will be as feasible as emailing a television program.

    In saying that, I'm not putting down your site; I'm praising it. I read it mostly on a cell phone and the quick loading and low bandwidth requirements are a plus.

    I'm commenting, of course, on your site's layout. As for its content, you have a few people worth reading, but the rest are bores and cranks -- running all the way to hard-core "holohoax" obsessives. In fact I would sooner send my friends a link to Vdare (and I care too much about keeping my friends to do that) than to unz.com.

    I never visit Breitbart or DailyMail, but I certainly agree it’s impossible to email out out webpages that are enormously heavy with all sorts of jquery/Javascript interactions, massive video, and lots of complex advertising. But as far as I know, none of the more purely HTML websites have ever had email capability either, and until the last few years, almost all websites were mostly just HTML. If you count WordPress sites, I’d think that even today 99% of all the sites on the Internet are basically just HTML with a little Javascript here and there.

    Frankly, when I wanted to implement this feature, I naturally assumed someone had already built an webpage emailing system years ago, and was surprised when I discovered that wasn’t the case. The problem really isn’t all that trivial in the fully general case, and I’ll even admit I cut some corners so long as the end result works on my reasonably complex HTML/CSS structures.

    As for the “cranks and bores” here, I’m sure absolutely everyone else agrees with you about that. It’s just that they have entirely disjoint views about who the “cranks and bores” actually are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew
    Your cleaner layout also makes your site more friendly to the Wayback machine, and that's a plus.

    The other clean&simple sites didn't pioneer "emailification" because, well, their clean&simple look reflected a lack of interest and perhaps expertise with web technology. How many innovations in automatic chicken feeders have come from organic farmers? ;)

    As for people like Giraldi, who can't drop so much as a paragraph without it getting streaked, on the way out, by their pustulent antisemitic sores and fissures, I'm left to wonder if you agree with them, or you're just giving them a platform to sit on, and embarrass themselves from.

    , @Kiza
    I have been visiting unz.com for quite a while now, and find it a great complement to TAC, but a much higher achievement for a much smaller budget. TAC is also relatively ideologically focused, whilst unz.com appears to aim for a diversity of opinions, again to its credit.

    Regarding the "cranks", well there appear to be some ideologically, politically and racially biased commentators. Personally, I like and respect that you are not moderating them out, even when they exceed norms, that is I am glad that unz.com is not as politically correct as the MSM. It is either political correctness or free exchange of opinions, it cannot be both. Also, often it is better to let people went their extreme thoughts and feelings and engage in a discussion, instead of suppressing them. Being a slave of political correctness is one of the biggest downsides of almost all moderated MSM comments sections, in addition to MSM promoting hidden agenda of their proprietors.

    But, so far I could not recognize any professional trolls for any side here. The absence of professional trolls is probably due to a narrower, non-mass audience that unz.com serves.

    Regarding the webpage converter to email, yes this reads like a unique achievement. About a year ago, I tried to get just images implanted into emails and suffered (a temporary) defeat when opening such emails in Outlook. It is exceptionally hard to produce something universal in HTML. Even browsers interpret HTML differently, let alone email clients (some do not even process HTML). I would probably have produced a PDF converter for emailing web pages instead of HTML. Regardless, it is great to have unz.com.

    , @Carlos
    @Ron Unz

    Recently Peter Frost wrote an article on African immigration to China. He deleted, or censored as I would call it, over 30 comments that Mr. Frost found disagreeable. Most of these comments he deleted were about Jews. And he said that he didn't want this site to resemble StormFront.

    I would like to know your stance on censoring comments here on this site, because I believe your mission was to create a site that was free from the kind of politically correct censoring that happens in the mainstream media.

    It seems to me that censoring comments that are trying to make a point and not obviously spam or inciting violence should not be allowed here. If you allow this kind of censorship to go on, then this is just like anyother run of the mill blog anywhere else on the internet. And you would just be wasting your time letting this site live on.

    I would like to know what groups, if any, we are not allowed to comment on. For instance, if commenting on Jews gets you censored, will commenting on blacks also get your comment deleted? What about gays, or transgendered? Are these groups also protected from commenting on this site?

    I definitely am gratefull you created this site, and fully believe in the reasoning behind it. But I think as long as people are being respectfull and not obviously trolling, people should be able to say anything about anyone.

    I for one am interested in how you handle this dilemma.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Georgina says:

    Are you ever going to do a followup to your story, American Pravda: Who Shot Down Flight MH17 in Ukraine? The story seems to have fallen off the radar of every other news organization. Hoped it would not happen here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. @Ron Unz
    I never visit Breitbart or DailyMail, but I certainly agree it's impossible to email out out webpages that are enormously heavy with all sorts of jquery/Javascript interactions, massive video, and lots of complex advertising. But as far as I know, none of the more purely HTML websites have ever had email capability either, and until the last few years, almost all websites were mostly just HTML. If you count WordPress sites, I'd think that even today 99% of all the sites on the Internet are basically just HTML with a little Javascript here and there.

    Frankly, when I wanted to implement this feature, I naturally assumed someone had already built an webpage emailing system years ago, and was surprised when I discovered that wasn't the case. The problem really isn't all that trivial in the fully general case, and I'll even admit I cut some corners so long as the end result works on my reasonably complex HTML/CSS structures.

    As for the "cranks and bores" here, I'm sure absolutely everyone else agrees with you about that. It's just that they have entirely disjoint views about who the "cranks and bores" actually are.

    Your cleaner layout also makes your site more friendly to the Wayback machine, and that’s a plus.

    The other clean&simple sites didn’t pioneer “emailification” because, well, their clean&simple look reflected a lack of interest and perhaps expertise with web technology. How many innovations in automatic chicken feeders have come from organic farmers? ;)

    As for people like Giraldi, who can’t drop so much as a paragraph without it getting streaked, on the way out, by their pustulent antisemitic sores and fissures, I’m left to wonder if you agree with them, or you’re just giving them a platform to sit on, and embarrass themselves from.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Casey
    I wonder if you really don't understand why he gives people you don't like a platform. I bet you understand it better than I understand what the point of your handle is. Are you trying to provoke an argument or are you trying to intimidate people who are disposed to disagree with you?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    The Paul Gottfried archive is missing his recent stuff:

    http://www.unz.com/pgottfried/

    http://www.unz.com/author/paul-gottfried/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. Kiza says:
    @Ron Unz
    I never visit Breitbart or DailyMail, but I certainly agree it's impossible to email out out webpages that are enormously heavy with all sorts of jquery/Javascript interactions, massive video, and lots of complex advertising. But as far as I know, none of the more purely HTML websites have ever had email capability either, and until the last few years, almost all websites were mostly just HTML. If you count WordPress sites, I'd think that even today 99% of all the sites on the Internet are basically just HTML with a little Javascript here and there.

    Frankly, when I wanted to implement this feature, I naturally assumed someone had already built an webpage emailing system years ago, and was surprised when I discovered that wasn't the case. The problem really isn't all that trivial in the fully general case, and I'll even admit I cut some corners so long as the end result works on my reasonably complex HTML/CSS structures.

    As for the "cranks and bores" here, I'm sure absolutely everyone else agrees with you about that. It's just that they have entirely disjoint views about who the "cranks and bores" actually are.

    I have been visiting unz.com for quite a while now, and find it a great complement to TAC, but a much higher achievement for a much smaller budget. TAC is also relatively ideologically focused, whilst unz.com appears to aim for a diversity of opinions, again to its credit.

    Regarding the “cranks”, well there appear to be some ideologically, politically and racially biased commentators. Personally, I like and respect that you are not moderating them out, even when they exceed norms, that is I am glad that unz.com is not as politically correct as the MSM. It is either political correctness or free exchange of opinions, it cannot be both. Also, often it is better to let people went their extreme thoughts and feelings and engage in a discussion, instead of suppressing them. Being a slave of political correctness is one of the biggest downsides of almost all moderated MSM comments sections, in addition to MSM promoting hidden agenda of their proprietors.

    But, so far I could not recognize any professional trolls for any side here. The absence of professional trolls is probably due to a narrower, non-mass audience that unz.com serves.

    Regarding the webpage converter to email, yes this reads like a unique achievement. About a year ago, I tried to get just images implanted into emails and suffered (a temporary) defeat when opening such emails in Outlook. It is exceptionally hard to produce something universal in HTML. Even browsers interpret HTML differently, let alone email clients (some do not even process HTML). I would probably have produced a PDF converter for emailing web pages instead of HTML. Regardless, it is great to have unz.com.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Clyde says:

    Why do crap when you can do it right!!! thanks for your efforts! Ron

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. Pat Casey says:
    @International Jew
    Your cleaner layout also makes your site more friendly to the Wayback machine, and that's a plus.

    The other clean&simple sites didn't pioneer "emailification" because, well, their clean&simple look reflected a lack of interest and perhaps expertise with web technology. How many innovations in automatic chicken feeders have come from organic farmers? ;)

    As for people like Giraldi, who can't drop so much as a paragraph without it getting streaked, on the way out, by their pustulent antisemitic sores and fissures, I'm left to wonder if you agree with them, or you're just giving them a platform to sit on, and embarrass themselves from.

    I wonder if you really don’t understand why he gives people you don’t like a platform. I bet you understand it better than I understand what the point of your handle is. Are you trying to provoke an argument or are you trying to intimidate people who are disposed to disagree with you?

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew

    I [don't] understand what the point of your handle
     
    It's a literary allusion--the title of a book that's the ur-Giraldi, ur-KevinMacDonald, ur-Svigor and many other Jew-on-the-brain obsessives who otherwise mar iSteve's fine site. My choosing it is a reminder of all that, and a gentle jab in the ribs analogous to "You've picked the wrong nigger to fuck with."

    Unz can say he's trying to be diverse and inclusive, but he still makes choices inevitably.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @Pat Casey
    I wonder if you really don't understand why he gives people you don't like a platform. I bet you understand it better than I understand what the point of your handle is. Are you trying to provoke an argument or are you trying to intimidate people who are disposed to disagree with you?

    I [don't] understand what the point of your handle

    It’s a literary allusion–the title of a book that’s the ur-Giraldi, ur-KevinMacDonald, ur-Svigor and many other Jew-on-the-brain obsessives who otherwise mar iSteve’s fine site. My choosing it is a reminder of all that, and a gentle jab in the ribs analogous to “You’ve picked the wrong nigger to fuck with.”

    Unz can say he’s trying to be diverse and inclusive, but he still makes choices inevitably.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Pat Casey says:

    I got ya. Actually I’m interested. I don’t read the first or last, but I’m quite familiar with Kevin MacDonald’s theories. Though I enjoy Kevin MacDonald the author and interviewee more than Kevin MacDonald the blogger, I have to say, if his theories are true, then you can’t blame the man for getting pissed off at current events that keep confirming he is right, can you?

    And the second part of the question is, Don’t you think his theories are basically true? I phrase it that way because I honestly don’t know how you would deny them. One time I looked it up, and the only person I could find who reviewed one of his books negatively with actual arguments for critique was John Derbyshire, and Derb is the master, but even I could see his arguments against the theory were actually kind of dumb. Nazis made an ideology that mirrored Jewish ethno-centric ideals; Judaism is a group evolutionary strategy; Ideologies manufactured by Jews can’t help but be to some extent Jewish. The first is a matter of historical record, and the other two are pretty much intuitive, even if watered down—but as I said, basically true.

    That said, being obsessed with any theory whether true or not eventually just becomes an obsession, and all obsessions make men ugly. Then again, if MacDonald were not treated as he is by his critics, don’t you think his opinions would be expressed more pleasantly, or maybe not at all?

    One more question. Long after he had been banished to the wilderness and left hovering above poverty, Joe Sobran remained under the surveillance of Jewish activists hell-bent on preventing him from speaking in public for a fee, and threatened potential employers with character assassination if they dared invite him to do so. That’s incredible, particularly considering it’s aim was to keep a man who had already been beaten from earning a living at all.

    Don’t you think those activists are simply bad people who should be shunned by other Jews? And since they are not shunned by any other Jews that I can tell, and are doing that stuff as Jews, can you really blame the fact of anti-Semitism?

    I should add, I pretty much have the exact same opinion on Jews and Israel as Steve Sailer does, not because I’m as naturally nuanced as Steve is, but because reading him has taught me to be.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. Dear person who wrote the note at the top of these comments:
    Who are you? I am used to seeing, on the dateline, an author identifier like “BY STEVE SAILER”. But who are you? If you are Ron Unz, thanks for all you do. A few suggestions…
    (1) Encourage writers (like yourself) to identify themselves.
    (2) The size of notes/essays is always given in multiples of 100; in this case, as “400 WORDS”. Does rounding off the word-count to the nearest multiple of 100 provide any advantage? An exact word-count would serve as a primitive way to distinguish rewritten versions of the same essay.

    I too am email-centric, and never even learned what RSS stands for. Maybe it refers to the RS’s of Richard Spencer (in comment #2), the climate scientist Roy Spenser, and the counterjihadi imam Robert Spencer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Meanwhile, for more modern users, who probably regard email is something akin to fax machines and stone tablets

    I do background investigations for the U.S. Govt. for security clearances (U.S. Office of Personnel Mgmt). We use fax machines on a daily basis. We use a DOS-based database to access case information, credit reports, etc. The VPN connection we use comes up with a dial-up modem option. It is like something out of the early 80′s. This is a federal agency that spends billions each year.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. Carlos says:
    @Ron Unz
    I never visit Breitbart or DailyMail, but I certainly agree it's impossible to email out out webpages that are enormously heavy with all sorts of jquery/Javascript interactions, massive video, and lots of complex advertising. But as far as I know, none of the more purely HTML websites have ever had email capability either, and until the last few years, almost all websites were mostly just HTML. If you count WordPress sites, I'd think that even today 99% of all the sites on the Internet are basically just HTML with a little Javascript here and there.

    Frankly, when I wanted to implement this feature, I naturally assumed someone had already built an webpage emailing system years ago, and was surprised when I discovered that wasn't the case. The problem really isn't all that trivial in the fully general case, and I'll even admit I cut some corners so long as the end result works on my reasonably complex HTML/CSS structures.

    As for the "cranks and bores" here, I'm sure absolutely everyone else agrees with you about that. It's just that they have entirely disjoint views about who the "cranks and bores" actually are.

    Recently Peter Frost wrote an article on African immigration to China. He deleted, or censored as I would call it, over 30 comments that Mr. Frost found disagreeable. Most of these comments he deleted were about Jews. And he said that he didn’t want this site to resemble StormFront.

    I would like to know your stance on censoring comments here on this site, because I believe your mission was to create a site that was free from the kind of politically correct censoring that happens in the mainstream media.

    It seems to me that censoring comments that are trying to make a point and not obviously spam or inciting violence should not be allowed here. If you allow this kind of censorship to go on, then this is just like anyother run of the mill blog anywhere else on the internet. And you would just be wasting your time letting this site live on.

    I would like to know what groups, if any, we are not allowed to comment on. For instance, if commenting on Jews gets you censored, will commenting on blacks also get your comment deleted? What about gays, or transgendered? Are these groups also protected from commenting on this site?

    I definitely am gratefull you created this site, and fully believe in the reasoning behind it. But I think as long as people are being respectfull and not obviously trolling, people should be able to say anything about anyone.

    I for one am interested in how you handle this dilemma.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    Well, personally I lean very much toward an almost totally free exchange of serious views in the comments, with absolutely minimal censorship. Obviously, comments filled with egregious profanity/racial slurs, very poor grammar/spelling, or explicit calls to violence tend to fall outside this reasonable range. But I'm busy with my own software work, and if commenters want to spout foolish ideas or argue with each other, I can't see why I should waste my spend my time trying to prevent that. Over the years I've also sometimes discovered I was totally wrong about various important things, and since seems likely to be the case on other matters today, perhaps it's actually the "foolish" commenters who are correct.

    There was one case a couple of years ago in which I very politely raised logical objections to the scientific theory of a certain notorious egomanic and was immediately banned from his blogsite as a consequence. I was totally outraged by such a reaction and having been a victim of such unfairness in the past is a major factor behind my own relaxed attitude toward contrary comments:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/gay-germ-censorship/

    Personally, it seems to me that if someone skews a debate by trashing polite, factual comments he finds disagreeable, one wonders whether his own research is similarly skewed towards a particular intended goal and is mere propaganda rather than objective investigation. I'd like to think all my own articles fall into the latter category and I've never had any problems with sharp, even vituperative criticism. For example, when I published my major Race/IQ article and series a couple of years ago, the reaction in the rightwing HBD-sphere was approximately 99% hostile, often intensely so, with personal insults galore. I later provided links to all those ferocious attacks, making them very conveniently available to future readers of my articles. But I strongly suspect that anyone who bothers reading through the tens of thousands of words will quickly decide who was correct and who was mistaken.

    http://www.unz.com/article/race-iq-and-wealth/

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-the-entire-series-and-debate/

    However, different people have views on this question. Several of the bloggers or columnists on this small webzine wish to moderate their own comments in much stricter fashion, which seems not unreasonable to me. If a particular writer regularly trashes your comments unfairly, either change your approach or just stop commenting on his pieces.


    Otherwise:

    @John N:

    When I designed the architecture of the website I distinguished "articles" from "blog posts" or minor columns, and although the "paul gottfried" archive contains everything, the "pgottfried" archive is restricted to the latter, although each links to the other. Since this seems to endlessly confuse people, perhaps my approach was a bad idea and I should just merge the two.

    @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY):

    I'm a little confused. I wrote the Announcement and my name appears right at the top.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Ron Unz says:
    @Carlos
    @Ron Unz

    Recently Peter Frost wrote an article on African immigration to China. He deleted, or censored as I would call it, over 30 comments that Mr. Frost found disagreeable. Most of these comments he deleted were about Jews. And he said that he didn't want this site to resemble StormFront.

    I would like to know your stance on censoring comments here on this site, because I believe your mission was to create a site that was free from the kind of politically correct censoring that happens in the mainstream media.

    It seems to me that censoring comments that are trying to make a point and not obviously spam or inciting violence should not be allowed here. If you allow this kind of censorship to go on, then this is just like anyother run of the mill blog anywhere else on the internet. And you would just be wasting your time letting this site live on.

    I would like to know what groups, if any, we are not allowed to comment on. For instance, if commenting on Jews gets you censored, will commenting on blacks also get your comment deleted? What about gays, or transgendered? Are these groups also protected from commenting on this site?

    I definitely am gratefull you created this site, and fully believe in the reasoning behind it. But I think as long as people are being respectfull and not obviously trolling, people should be able to say anything about anyone.

    I for one am interested in how you handle this dilemma.

    Well, personally I lean very much toward an almost totally free exchange of serious views in the comments, with absolutely minimal censorship. Obviously, comments filled with egregious profanity/racial slurs, very poor grammar/spelling, or explicit calls to violence tend to fall outside this reasonable range. But I’m busy with my own software work, and if commenters want to spout foolish ideas or argue with each other, I can’t see why I should waste my spend my time trying to prevent that. Over the years I’ve also sometimes discovered I was totally wrong about various important things, and since seems likely to be the case on other matters today, perhaps it’s actually the “foolish” commenters who are correct.

    There was one case a couple of years ago in which I very politely raised logical objections to the scientific theory of a certain notorious egomanic and was immediately banned from his blogsite as a consequence. I was totally outraged by such a reaction and having been a victim of such unfairness in the past is a major factor behind my own relaxed attitude toward contrary comments:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/gay-germ-censorship/

    Personally, it seems to me that if someone skews a debate by trashing polite, factual comments he finds disagreeable, one wonders whether his own research is similarly skewed towards a particular intended goal and is mere propaganda rather than objective investigation. I’d like to think all my own articles fall into the latter category and I’ve never had any problems with sharp, even vituperative criticism. For example, when I published my major Race/IQ article and series a couple of years ago, the reaction in the rightwing HBD-sphere was approximately 99% hostile, often intensely so, with personal insults galore. I later provided links to all those ferocious attacks, making them very conveniently available to future readers of my articles. But I strongly suspect that anyone who bothers reading through the tens of thousands of words will quickly decide who was correct and who was mistaken.

    http://www.unz.com/article/race-iq-and-wealth/

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-the-entire-series-and-debate/

    However, different people have views on this question. Several of the bloggers or columnists on this small webzine wish to moderate their own comments in much stricter fashion, which seems not unreasonable to me. If a particular writer regularly trashes your comments unfairly, either change your approach or just stop commenting on his pieces.

    Otherwise:

    @John N:

    When I designed the architecture of the website I distinguished “articles” from “blog posts” or minor columns, and although the “paul gottfried” archive contains everything, the “pgottfried” archive is restricted to the latter, although each links to the other. Since this seems to endlessly confuse people, perhaps my approach was a bad idea and I should just merge the two.

    I’m a little confused. I wrote the Announcement and my name appears right at the top.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)
    "@Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY):
    I’m a little confused. I wrote the Announcement and my name appears right at the top."

    I'm confused too. I see "Announcements" on the top right of the page, and I see the essay title "Updated: Emailing and Other Old-Fashioned Technologies". Neither is accompanied by the name "Ron Unz". You say your name appears "right at the top." At the top of what? (I feel like I'm in a 'Twilight Zone' episode.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Hail says: • Website
    @International Jew
    The reason you were able to do this, and Breitbart or DailyMail won't and can't, is that your layout is far simpler, and static, to begin with. The direction most commercial websites are going, pretty soon emailing their content will be as feasible as emailing a television program.

    In saying that, I'm not putting down your site; I'm praising it. I read it mostly on a cell phone and the quick loading and low bandwidth requirements are a plus.

    I'm commenting, of course, on your site's layout. As for its content, you have a few people worth reading, but the rest are bores and cranks -- running all the way to hard-core "holohoax" obsessives. In fact I would sooner send my friends a link to Vdare (and I care too much about keeping my friends to do that) than to unz.com.

    your layout is far simpler, and static, to begin with.[....] I’m praising it. I read it mostly on a cell phone and the quick loading and low bandwidth requirements are a plus.

    Agreed. Please don’t make any big changes that bog things down. This site is sleek and almost entirely perfect the way it is for my tastes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. @Ron Unz
    Well, personally I lean very much toward an almost totally free exchange of serious views in the comments, with absolutely minimal censorship. Obviously, comments filled with egregious profanity/racial slurs, very poor grammar/spelling, or explicit calls to violence tend to fall outside this reasonable range. But I'm busy with my own software work, and if commenters want to spout foolish ideas or argue with each other, I can't see why I should waste my spend my time trying to prevent that. Over the years I've also sometimes discovered I was totally wrong about various important things, and since seems likely to be the case on other matters today, perhaps it's actually the "foolish" commenters who are correct.

    There was one case a couple of years ago in which I very politely raised logical objections to the scientific theory of a certain notorious egomanic and was immediately banned from his blogsite as a consequence. I was totally outraged by such a reaction and having been a victim of such unfairness in the past is a major factor behind my own relaxed attitude toward contrary comments:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/gay-germ-censorship/

    Personally, it seems to me that if someone skews a debate by trashing polite, factual comments he finds disagreeable, one wonders whether his own research is similarly skewed towards a particular intended goal and is mere propaganda rather than objective investigation. I'd like to think all my own articles fall into the latter category and I've never had any problems with sharp, even vituperative criticism. For example, when I published my major Race/IQ article and series a couple of years ago, the reaction in the rightwing HBD-sphere was approximately 99% hostile, often intensely so, with personal insults galore. I later provided links to all those ferocious attacks, making them very conveniently available to future readers of my articles. But I strongly suspect that anyone who bothers reading through the tens of thousands of words will quickly decide who was correct and who was mistaken.

    http://www.unz.com/article/race-iq-and-wealth/

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-the-entire-series-and-debate/

    However, different people have views on this question. Several of the bloggers or columnists on this small webzine wish to moderate their own comments in much stricter fashion, which seems not unreasonable to me. If a particular writer regularly trashes your comments unfairly, either change your approach or just stop commenting on his pieces.


    Otherwise:

    @John N:

    When I designed the architecture of the website I distinguished "articles" from "blog posts" or minor columns, and although the "paul gottfried" archive contains everything, the "pgottfried" archive is restricted to the latter, although each links to the other. Since this seems to endlessly confuse people, perhaps my approach was a bad idea and I should just merge the two.

    @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY):

    I'm a little confused. I wrote the Announcement and my name appears right at the top.

    “:
    I’m a little confused. I wrote the Announcement and my name appears right at the top.”

    I’m confused too. I see “Announcements” on the top right of the page, and I see the essay title “Updated: Emailing and Other Old-Fashioned Technologies”. Neither is accompanied by the name “Ron Unz”. You say your name appears “right at the top.” At the top of what? (I feel like I’m in a ‘Twilight Zone’ episode.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    A misunderstanding. On the Home page, there's no name listed because "Announcements" are a special category, with the particular author not being too important. But if you actually look at an Announcement page such as this one, the author's name is right at the top, just below the title.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. jb says:

    Having dabbled a little in CSS myself, I can appreciate the difficulty of what you’ve accomplished. What isn’t clear to me is what’s gained. What big advantage is there in sending a fully-rendered webpage, as opposed to a simple link? I can see only two advantages: 1) the recipient is spared the exertion of clicking on the link; and 2) if the article disappears from the web site the recipient will still have a copy in his mail queue. Nice, but not all that compelling it seems to me. Am I missing something?

    Personally I never use mailing buttons anyway; I just cut and paste links into my emails. Mainly because I like to have a saved copy of everything I send in an outbox!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    Well, I'm hardly claiming it's revolutionary, but it does have some nice advantages.

    An emailed link must be clicked to examine and lots of people are reluctant to click unknown links. By contrast an emailed webpage, including images, can be skimmed or fully in the email client without any additional effort or risk. That's why everyone sends out ads in full HTML emails.

    Also, I've now built an automatic Weekly Digest that can be sent out to people, containing the highlights of the previous week's articles and columns, with clickable links to read the full articles that are interesting. Sending out a simple weekly link wouldn't have the same value.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Ron Unz says:
    @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)
    "@Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY):
    I’m a little confused. I wrote the Announcement and my name appears right at the top."

    I'm confused too. I see "Announcements" on the top right of the page, and I see the essay title "Updated: Emailing and Other Old-Fashioned Technologies". Neither is accompanied by the name "Ron Unz". You say your name appears "right at the top." At the top of what? (I feel like I'm in a 'Twilight Zone' episode.)

    A misunderstanding. On the Home page, there’s no name listed because “Announcements” are a special category, with the particular author not being too important. But if you actually look at an Announcement page such as this one, the author’s name is right at the top, just below the title.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)
    Hello, Ron Unz. Sorry to pester you, but I must still be misunderstanding something. The "Announcement page such as this one" (i.e., the page on which this comment appears) says, when I scroll to the top:
    Updated: Emailing and Other Old-Fashioned Technologies
    BY FEBRUARY 11, 2015 500 WORDS 25 COMMENTS 5 NEW REPLY
    (where represents a centered dot (a raised period)).
    No name follows the "BY". Are we looking at the same heading? Is there something wrong on my end?
    , @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)
    Hello, Ron Unz. Sorry to pester you, but I must still be misunderstanding something. The "Announcement page such as this one" (i.e., the page on which this comment appears) says, when I scroll to the top:
    Updated: Emailing and Other Old-Fashioned Technologies
    BY FEBRUARY 11, 2015 500 WORDS 25 COMMENTS 5 NEW REPLY
    (where represents a centered dot (a raised period)).
    No name follows the "BY". Are we looking at the same heading? Is there something wrong on my end?

    Oh no, what I type does not appear: a "" (greater-than character) appears as a blank space. I meant this to represent a centered dot.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Ron Unz says:
    @jb
    Having dabbled a little in CSS myself, I can appreciate the difficulty of what you've accomplished. What isn't clear to me is what's gained. What big advantage is there in sending a fully-rendered webpage, as opposed to a simple link? I can see only two advantages: 1) the recipient is spared the exertion of clicking on the link; and 2) if the article disappears from the web site the recipient will still have a copy in his mail queue. Nice, but not all that compelling it seems to me. Am I missing something?

    Personally I never use mailing buttons anyway; I just cut and paste links into my emails. Mainly because I like to have a saved copy of everything I send in an outbox!

    Well, I’m hardly claiming it’s revolutionary, but it does have some nice advantages.

    An emailed link must be clicked to examine and lots of people are reluctant to click unknown links. By contrast an emailed webpage, including images, can be skimmed or fully in the email client without any additional effort or risk. That’s why everyone sends out ads in full HTML emails.

    Also, I’ve now built an automatic Weekly Digest that can be sent out to people, containing the highlights of the previous week’s articles and columns, with clickable links to read the full articles that are interesting. Sending out a simple weekly link wouldn’t have the same value.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @Ron Unz
    A misunderstanding. On the Home page, there's no name listed because "Announcements" are a special category, with the particular author not being too important. But if you actually look at an Announcement page such as this one, the author's name is right at the top, just below the title.

    Hello, Ron Unz. Sorry to pester you, but I must still be misunderstanding something. The “Announcement page such as this one” (i.e., the page on which this comment appears) says, when I scroll to the top:
    Updated: Emailing and Other Old-Fashioned Technologies
    BY FEBRUARY 11, 2015 500 WORDS 25 COMMENTS 5 NEW REPLY
    (where represents a centered dot (a raised period)).
    No name follows the “BY”. Are we looking at the same heading? Is there something wrong on my end?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    You were 100% correct. There was a display bug on Announcement pages that didn't manifest itself in Admin mode, which I normally use when I visit the website. I've now fixed it so the name should be appearing.

    This is exactly the sort of reason I try to read these comments.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @Ron Unz
    A misunderstanding. On the Home page, there's no name listed because "Announcements" are a special category, with the particular author not being too important. But if you actually look at an Announcement page such as this one, the author's name is right at the top, just below the title.

    Hello, Ron Unz. Sorry to pester you, but I must still be misunderstanding something. The “Announcement page such as this one” (i.e., the page on which this comment appears) says, when I scroll to the top:
    Updated: Emailing and Other Old-Fashioned Technologies
    BY FEBRUARY 11, 2015 500 WORDS 25 COMMENTS 5 NEW REPLY
    (where represents a centered dot (a raised period)).
    No name follows the “BY”. Are we looking at the same heading? Is there something wrong on my end?

    Oh no, what I type does not appear: a “” (greater-than character) appears as a blank space. I meant this to represent a centered dot.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Ron Unz says:
    @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)
    Hello, Ron Unz. Sorry to pester you, but I must still be misunderstanding something. The "Announcement page such as this one" (i.e., the page on which this comment appears) says, when I scroll to the top:
    Updated: Emailing and Other Old-Fashioned Technologies
    BY FEBRUARY 11, 2015 500 WORDS 25 COMMENTS 5 NEW REPLY
    (where represents a centered dot (a raised period)).
    No name follows the "BY". Are we looking at the same heading? Is there something wrong on my end?

    You were 100% correct. There was a display bug on Announcement pages that didn’t manifest itself in Admin mode, which I normally use when I visit the website. I’ve now fixed it so the name should be appearing.

    This is exactly the sort of reason I try to read these comments.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. He deleted, or censored as I would call it, over 30 comments that Mr. Frost found disagreeable. Most of these comments he deleted were about Jews.

    Carlos,

    Most of those comments had very little intellectual content, and many were barely readable. They were typically along the lines of:

    “A + B = C because Jews”

    I occasionally publish off-topic comments if they are very interesting. Otherwise, I don’t. My time is limited, and I prefer to spend it replying to on-topic comments. So, yeah, there is a double standard: a higher one for off-topic comments and a lower one for on-topic comments. Sounds reasonable to me.

    I’ve already discussed my commenting policy at some length with you, with Ron, and with many others. I consider the matter closed. If this issue continues to come up again and again, I will return to my old site. Please, I don’t enjoy reading personal attacks on myself or my integrity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dahlia
    Dr. Frost,
    Relatedly from your Africa column you wrote:
    "I didn’t have this problem with off-topic comments on my old website. When I told my commenters to stay on-topic, they usually did. This is a larger problem than that of “Jews, jews, jews.” Some commenters here are very narcissistic. They are keenly aware of their own views, while being indifferent to those of others, including those of the columnist."
    --------------
    I love what Unz is trying to achieve, but even this lowly commenter, as well as some of the other "iSteve regulars", has experienced exactly this narcissism. We don't get the unsolicited advice on how to run our column among other things, but get the worst assumed about us and attacked as such despite Unz's quite handy commenter history tool: Narcissists, did you know, or bother to learn a thing about us, before your attacks? No, y'all did not. And then y'all become more hateful and try to gaslight...

    Why here and now, I don't know. It has been educational, and I sincerely mean that; I'm glad now that a light hand was taken with censorship.

    There are new and excellent commenters which is something to rejoice. Hopefully, it will all shake out with the new ones staying and the others leaving.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Is the email feature temporarily suspended until the coming work week because we so many emails sent out that we exceeded the quota allowed, and have to get it upgraded?

    If so, sorry for the inconvenience.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. Dahlia says:
    @Peter Frost
    He deleted, or censored as I would call it, over 30 comments that Mr. Frost found disagreeable. Most of these comments he deleted were about Jews.

    Carlos,

    Most of those comments had very little intellectual content, and many were barely readable. They were typically along the lines of:

    "A + B = C because Jews"

    I occasionally publish off-topic comments if they are very interesting. Otherwise, I don't. My time is limited, and I prefer to spend it replying to on-topic comments. So, yeah, there is a double standard: a higher one for off-topic comments and a lower one for on-topic comments. Sounds reasonable to me.

    I've already discussed my commenting policy at some length with you, with Ron, and with many others. I consider the matter closed. If this issue continues to come up again and again, I will return to my old site. Please, I don't enjoy reading personal attacks on myself or my integrity.

    Dr. Frost,
    Relatedly from your Africa column you wrote:
    “I didn’t have this problem with off-topic comments on my old website. When I told my commenters to stay on-topic, they usually did. This is a larger problem than that of “Jews, jews, jews.” Some commenters here are very narcissistic. They are keenly aware of their own views, while being indifferent to those of others, including those of the columnist.”
    ————–
    I love what Unz is trying to achieve, but even this lowly commenter, as well as some of the other “iSteve regulars”, has experienced exactly this narcissism. We don’t get the unsolicited advice on how to run our column among other things, but get the worst assumed about us and attacked as such despite Unz’s quite handy commenter history tool: Narcissists, did you know, or bother to learn a thing about us, before your attacks? No, y’all did not. And then y’all become more hateful and try to gaslight…

    Why here and now, I don’t know. It has been educational, and I sincerely mean that; I’m glad now that a light hand was taken with censorship.

    There are new and excellent commenters which is something to rejoice. Hopefully, it will all shake out with the new ones staying and the others leaving.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Carlos says:

    Peter. I doubt anyone here wants you to leave. Please don’t.

    But I still don’t see the reason to censor anyone who isn’t obviously trolling. Narrowly defining what is on topic and what is off topic is just another way of saying I don’t want to argue with someone who disagrees with me. It’s like saying on the huffington post that we will discuss crime in Detroit, but no one is allowed to talk about black people. How many people here will say A +B = C because of blacks. Will they be censored too?

    Just because people want to talk about Jews, doesn’t mean that they hate Jews. Or that there is nothing to be gained through discussion. If you read the other columns here you will see that Jews, Blacks, Chinese, Muslims, and Mexicans are all discussed here.

    What do we gain by not freely discussing things?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. Chang says:

    I am always impressed by the speed of this site. Especially compared to the machine crushing script-heavy sites common on the Right, like DailyCaller. I understand, though, they are dependent on ads and trying every last trick to squeeze out every last penny.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    Thanks for the kind words.

    Actually, once my heavy development cycle is completed, probably quite soon, I'll probably be moving all the "includes" to the cloud and enabling various caching options, which should considerably increase the site's loading speed. These sorts of things tend to be a headache when the code is constantly undergoing major changes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Ron Unz says:
    @Chang
    I am always impressed by the speed of this site. Especially compared to the machine crushing script-heavy sites common on the Right, like DailyCaller. I understand, though, they are dependent on ads and trying every last trick to squeeze out every last penny.

    Thanks for the kind words.

    Actually, once my heavy development cycle is completed, probably quite soon, I’ll probably be moving all the “includes” to the cloud and enabling various caching options, which should considerably increase the site’s loading speed. These sorts of things tend to be a headache when the code is constantly undergoing major changes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
Personal Classics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation
What the facts tell us about a taboo subject